HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2441  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2015, 11:57 PM
BrutallyDishonest BrutallyDishonest is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGirl View Post
New owners want the city to remove heritage status so they can demolish the glass house in the Crescents and build new. Something is weird in this story; they say they don't have much choice but to demolish it. Why would you buy a house that doesn't work for you? I hope this doesn't get pulled down for a Usonia ugly chicken coop.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Glass+house+facing+demolition/10827476/story.html
This is why Regina has horrible architecture. Because people like you think that contemporary architecture is a "chicken coop" and but faux-Victorian pastiche is the hallmark of design that can never be surpassed. It's not 1915 anymore.

Last edited by BrutallyDishonest; Feb 21, 2015 at 1:30 AM.
     
     
  #2442  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 1:25 AM
one_brick_at_a_time's Avatar
one_brick_at_a_time one_brick_at_a_time is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Regina/Toronto
Posts: 2,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest View Post
This is why Regina has horrible architecture. Because people like you think that contemporary architecture is a "chick coop" and but faux-Victorian pastiche is the hallmark of design that can never be surpassed. It's not 1915 anymore.
I am loving the new Usonia homes and I realize that half the time why Reginan's don't like them is because there has always been a struggle to accept change in the city from some. (Not saying this is you Stealthgirl) The homes are a fresh, unique with clean visual lines and different style of home that Regina doesn't have much of. I like them way more then the cookie cutter homes that make up for most of the new construction in for example Harbour Landing.

I grew up in old Lakeview and I am loving the infill of Usonia homes in between the older beautiful ones. It definitely adds to the neighbourhood in a very positive way through investment and adding to property value not to mention the contemporary feel. There has been infill in the same area with the regular 90's stucco crap that looks like every other house and it's boring and visually so cookie-cutter.
     
     
  #2443  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 2:12 AM
StealthGirl's Avatar
StealthGirl StealthGirl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,272
I'm not a fan of the flat roof and I don't like basement garages. Those seem to be pretty common with Usonia. That's all. Just not a design I'm fond of.

B_H, you are judging me based on the fact I don't like one style?! Seriously? I posted about the glass house because I think it's an interesting discussion and a timely one as some of the heritage properties are getting to the point where they need significant spending to restore/save/demolish. The city doesn't have much a policy to address this. I never said this house had to be saved so you can stuff it with you "people like you" comment.

One_brick, I agree some infill has been done well. I would hope that continues.
     
     
  #2444  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 3:31 AM
jigglysquishy's Avatar
jigglysquishy jigglysquishy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,326
The infill is still largely poor. Replacing a single family home with a larger single family home does nothing to improve the community.
     
     
  #2445  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 4:12 AM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigglysquishy View Post
The infill is still largely poor. Replacing a single family home with a larger single family home does nothing to improve the community.
Really? Replacing a run down house with a high quality house with more than double the tax assessment is not an improvement? Should we be encouraging people to build small, crappy homes to improve their community?

Last edited by Stormer; Feb 21, 2015 at 4:32 AM.
     
     
  #2446  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 10:44 AM
SkydivePilot SkydivePilot is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: REGINA
Posts: 2,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormer View Post
Really? Replacing a run down house with a high quality house with more than double the tax assessment is not an improvement? Should we be encouraging people to build small, crappy homes to improve their community?
I second that.
     
     
  #2447  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 3:10 PM
jigglysquishy's Avatar
jigglysquishy jigglysquishy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,326
These lots should be redeveloped into higher density units. A new single family unit won't be redone as multi-unit for another 40 years.

We badly need higher density in core areas and building new single family units in core areas doesn't help at all.
     
     
  #2448  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 10:48 PM
BrutallyDishonest BrutallyDishonest is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGirl View Post
I'm not a fan of the flat roof and I don't like basement garages. Those seem to be pretty common with Usonia. That's all. Just not a design I'm fond of.

B_H, you are judging me based on the fact I don't like one style?! Seriously? I posted about the glass house because I think it's an interesting discussion and a timely one as some of the heritage properties are getting to the point where they need significant spending to restore/save/demolish. The city doesn't have much a policy to address this. I never said this house had to be saved so you can stuff it with you "people like you" comment.

One_brick, I agree some infill has been done well. I would hope that continues.
Yes, this demonstrates your ignorance.

Disliking "flat roofs" disregards an extremely sizable amount of architectural history.

As for basement garages, very few of the Usonia-style homes (and lets be clear there are more than one builder doing contemporary design) on core in-fill lots have those. Even among suburban houses the basement garage is relatively rare. If you're against attached garages in general then I'd agree, but that's not basement. (Basement is better than ground-level, aesthetically speaking anyway)

So yes, I'm judging your for your bad taste. What makes design interesting is difference or contrast. It is people like you who actively support banning contemporary design in older-neighbourhoods, pretending that places should be treated like a museum rather than living, changing places.

Not liking modern design in in-fill housing is ridiculous. We should be encouraging people to modernize and redevelop core properties, rather than continuing to sprawl outwards. Your attitude is exactly what creates sprawl.

As for your comment on heritage properties, you are wrong again. The city does have a policy. If the house is actually listed then it's got a good amount of protection. The heritage holding list is simply a wish-list created by volunteers and minor-bureaucrats. The Glass House isn't protected and it shouldn't be if the owners don't want it. Besides that, it isn't even particularly interesting architecturally. It's a mismatch of styles poorly executed.
     
     
  #2449  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 10:56 PM
BrutallyDishonest BrutallyDishonest is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigglysquishy View Post
These lots should be redeveloped into higher density units. A new single family unit won't be redone as multi-unit for another 40 years.

We badly need higher density in core areas and building new single family units in core areas doesn't help at all.
Give me a break.

I'm a huge fan of density, but you have to be realistic. There will always been single family houses. If you think that an Albert Street house (which is house, really is), with its prominence and history is going to be turned into a four-plex or something you aren't thinking straight. Replacing a single-family house for another single family house.

You also ignore the economics of multifamily housing.

Our focus on high density should be on areas like 13th Ave, Broad St, College Ave, and Victoria Ave, where mixed use developments should be encouraged and even enforced in the future.

But Albert St? Really?
     
     
  #2450  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2015, 11:08 PM
brithgob brithgob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest View Post
Yes, this demonstrates your ignorance.

Disliking "flat roofs" disregards an extremely sizable amount of architectural history.

As for basement garages, very few of the Usonia-style homes (and lets be clear there are more than one builder doing contemporary design) on core in-fill lots have those. Even among suburban houses the basement garage is relatively rare. If you're against attached garages in general then I'd agree, but that's not basement. (Basement is better than ground-level, aesthetically speaking anyway)

So yes, I'm judging your for your bad taste. What makes design interesting is difference or contrast. It is people like you who actively support banning contemporary design in older-neighbourhoods, pretending that places should be treated like a museum rather than living, changing places.

Not liking modern design in in-fill housing is ridiculous. We should be encouraging people to modernize and redevelop core properties, rather than continuing to sprawl outwards. Your attitude is exactly what creates sprawl.

As for your comment on heritage properties, you are wrong again. The city does have a policy. If the house is actually listed then it's got a good amount of protection. The heritage holding list is simply a wish-list created by volunteers and minor-bureaucrats. The Glass House isn't protected and it shouldn't be if the owners don't want it. Besides that, it isn't even particularly interesting architecturally. It's a mismatch of styles poorly executed.
I'm only going to wade into this to suggest that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and everyone has the right to like or dislike whatever they want.
     
     
  #2451  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2015, 2:00 AM
thefourthtower thefourthtower is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Rueannatta
Posts: 2,597
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Saskatoon+stagnant+skyline/10832391/story.html
Saskatoon's stagnant skyline

Number of factors explain why city's growth has not translated into tall towers

BY PHIL TANK, THE STARPHOENIX FEBRUARY 21, 2015


In time some new towers will be built it might be a little more difficult to build these towers with the down turn of oil prices , I know Regina has built six high rises in the past few years and capital pointe is supposedly making a announcement on the first week of March , but who knows what's going on there , the two 15 story residential twin towers are also in the works for the central core , so here goes Saskatoon one day it will happen
     
     
  #2452  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2015, 1:57 PM
StealthGirl's Avatar
StealthGirl StealthGirl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by brithgob View Post
I'm only going to wade into this to suggest that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and everyone has the right to like or dislike whatever they want.
I have put BH on my ignore list; I'm not going to argue with someone who isn't going to listen to what I have to say anyway. It's a waste of time for this forum. That's not discussion.

Stay warm, folks!!
     
     
  #2453  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2015, 5:17 PM
thefourthtower thefourthtower is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Rueannatta
Posts: 2,597
http://www.ciaodevelopments.com/Office_Development.html

A viewing of the harbour landing business park , are all four buildings built ?
     
     
  #2454  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2015, 10:05 PM
BrutallyDishonest BrutallyDishonest is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGirl View Post
I have put BH on my ignore list; I'm not going to argue with someone who isn't going to listen to what I have to say anyway. It's a waste of time for this forum. That's not discussion.

Stay warm, folks!!
You didn't say anything. I refuted you point by point and you simple ignored it all.

No loss.

     
     
  #2455  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2015, 6:23 AM
Festivus Festivus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest View Post
Yes, this demonstrates your ignorance.

Disliking "flat roofs" disregards an extremely sizable amount of architectural history.

As for basement garages, very few of the Usonia-style homes (and lets be clear there are more than one builder doing contemporary design) on core in-fill lots have those. Even among suburban houses the basement garage is relatively rare. If you're against attached garages in general then I'd agree, but that's not basement. (Basement is better than ground-level, aesthetically speaking anyway)

So yes, I'm judging your for your bad taste. What makes design interesting is difference or contrast. It is people like you who actively support banning contemporary design in older-neighbourhoods, pretending that places should be treated like a museum rather than living, changing places.

Not liking modern design in in-fill housing is ridiculous. We should be encouraging people to modernize and redevelop core properties, rather than continuing to sprawl outwards. Your attitude is exactly what creates sprawl.

As for your comment on heritage properties, you are wrong again. The city does have a policy. If the house is actually listed then it's got a good amount of protection. The heritage holding list is simply a wish-list created by volunteers and minor-bureaucrats. The Glass House isn't protected and it shouldn't be if the owners don't want it. Besides that, it isn't even particularly interesting architecturally. It's a mismatch of styles poorly executed.
You seem like a very angry man.

1) Not liking something doesn't mean disregarding it's importance. I can not like the colour blue, but that doesn't mean I am discounting Pepsi or the sky or the oceans.

2) Not wanting a flat roof or other modern styles in an old neighbourhood doesn't mean someone wants them banned. Don't conflate things like that.

Take a chill pill, man.
     
     
  #2456  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2015, 6:34 AM
Festivus Festivus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefourthtower View Post
http://www.ciaodevelopments.com/Office_Development.html

A viewing of the harbour landing business park , are all four buildings built ?
No. 2 are complete and a 3rd is currently under construction.

That whole area is a clusterfuck though. I live in the apartments directly south of them, and the placement of roads is pretty horrible in relation to the commercial buildings. Basically driving through the commercial property is much much quicker than using the city roads...so everyone does it. The commercial property then responded to this by putting up signs saying that it's private property and thoroughfare was illegal. That hasn't stopped anyone, obviously, and never will. If you introduce a quicker way to get to somewhere then people are going to use it.

What also grinds my gears is that apartments were built with far too few parking stalls to accommodate demand. I don't know what the city bylaw is for multi-unit dwellings, but it's probably 1.5 cars per unit or something like that which is unrealistic today. There are probably 2.5 cars for every unit if I had to guess. Every night Tutor Crt fills up will vehicles (including blocking all fire hydrants). Harbour Landing Dr used to also fill up, but this year the city banned parking on it for the entire area around the apartments, which is ridiculous. I imagine the concern was that the road would be too narrow in the winter, but they should have just blocked one side. Right now if you want to have people visit you (or you live there but can't get an extra spot) you sometimes have to park 2-3 city blocks away because there is no on-street parking available for that distance because the city has banned it. The city did the same thing for an area in the west end, and in both cases they gave no notice to residence. So people move into these areas expecting nearby parking, and then the city bans it for blocks in each direction.

Altern (owners of buildings) have also sold off all the visitor parking to tenants. I think there are 3-5 visitor spots now for about 350 units. Yeah, seriously. And tenants park in them every night anyway. Oh, and want a handicap spot? Tough luck because Altern also eliminated all of those and sold them to tenants too. And want to park 3 blocks away and walk to a unit? Tough luck there too because Altern takes 2 days to shovel the sidewalk after it snows. And once you reach their property want to walk from the street to a building across the parking lot? Too bad, because they don't even clear their own internal sidewalks at all, they put up signs saying they are too dangerous, and then proceed to shovel snow onto them all winter. So you have to walk in the middle of driving lanes the entire way from the street 100-200m to a unit on the other side of the complex.

They are fine to deal with in terms of building issues, but their parking lot management is the worst I've ever seen anywhere and I would actively recommend that anyone not move onto their properties because of this.
     
     
  #2457  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2015, 7:01 AM
skphc08's Avatar
skphc08 skphc08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Central
Posts: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefourthtower View Post
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Saskatoon+stagnant+skyline/10832391/story.html
Saskatoon's stagnant skyline

Number of factors explain why city's growth has not translated into tall towers

BY PHIL TANK, THE STARPHOENIX FEBRUARY 21, 2015
Why did you post this in the Regina forum???
__________________
Everything is real on this concrete and steel.
     
     
  #2458  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2015, 7:39 AM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Hmm....
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by skphc08 View Post
Why did you post this in the Regina forum???
Probably just for the part he quoted about Regina:

Quote:
In time some new towers will be built it might be a little more difficult to build these towers with the down turn of oil prices , I know Regina has built six high rises in the past few years and capital pointe is supposedly making a announcement on the first week of March , but who knows what's going on there , the two 15 story residential twin towers are also in the works for the central core , so here goes Saskatoon one day it will happen
     
     
  #2459  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2015, 1:38 PM
BrutallyDishonest BrutallyDishonest is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Festivus View Post
You seem like a very angry man.

1) Not liking something doesn't mean disregarding it's importance. I can not like the colour blue, but that doesn't mean I am discounting Pepsi or the sky or the oceans.

2) Not wanting a flat roof or other modern styles in an old neighbourhood doesn't mean someone wants them banned. Don't conflate things like that.

Take a chill pill, man.
Actually it does. There are literally people in these neighbourhoods and on this forum that want it banned.

It's not an academic exercise.
     
     
  #2460  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2015, 2:31 PM
HomeInMyShoes's Avatar
HomeInMyShoes HomeInMyShoes is offline
arf
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: File 13
Posts: 14,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by one_brick_at_a_time View Post
I am loving the new Usonia homes and I realize that half the time why Reginan's don't like them is because there has always been a struggle to accept change in the city from some. (Not saying this is you Stealthgirl) The homes are a fresh, unique with clean visual lines and different style of home that Regina doesn't have much of. I like them way more then the cookie cutter homes that make up for most of the new construction in for example Harbour Landing.

I grew up in old Lakeview and I am loving the infill of Usonia homes in between the older beautiful ones. It definitely adds to the neighbourhood in a very positive way through investment and adding to property value not to mention the contemporary feel. There has been infill in the same area with the regular 90's stucco crap that looks like every other house and it's boring and visually so cookie-cutter.
Some of them I like, some of them not so much. this one on the corner of Montague and 20th is really a dud for me aesthetically. It is just the wrong design for a corner lot visually. Then again, maybe that house should have been facing 20th and not Montague as a first step.
__________________

-- “We heal each other with kindness, gentleness and respect.” -- Richard Wagamese
-- “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:45 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.